12 yr old testimony drama

[MrShorty]

1 hour ago, Carborendum said:

I'm reminded of the tactics used in Vietnam.  They would strap bombs to children and send them running towards the American encampments.  Either they succeed in getting the bomb in or the Americans get labeled "Baby-killers".  Either way, they win. 

I don't know, Carb. I just can't quite see how "shut Savannah's mic off or let Savannah finish" quite parallels this. Perhaps I am just dense, but I don't see the "bomb" Savannah is carrying. I can't imagine anyone (whether they understand testimony meeting or not) that could twist allowing Savannah to finish her statement into some form of "see the Church is committed to caving on this issue and will be performing homosexual temple marriages in the next 3 years". I'm not very savvy regarding JaG's slippery slope and when it is fallacious and when it is genuine. I don't know where to draw the line in testimony meeting around letting people have their say and cutting them off. In general, we seem to be pretty good at shrugging off the other stuff that people say in testimony meeting, What is different here that makes it so difficult to simply shrug off "crazy Savannah claiming that she wants to someday go apostate and marry a woman someday"?

[Guest]

1 hour ago, MrShorty said:

I don't know, Carb. I just can't quite see how "shut Savannah's mic off or let Savannah finish" quite parallels this. Perhaps I am just dense, but I don't see the "bomb" Savannah is carrying. I can't imagine anyone (whether they understand testimony meeting or not) that could twist allowing Savannah to finish her statement into some form of "see the Church is committed to caving on this issue and will be performing homosexual temple marriages in the next 3 years". I'm not very savvy regarding JaG's slippery slope and when it is fallacious and when it is genuine. I don't know where to draw the line in testimony meeting around letting people have their say and cutting them off. In general, we seem to be pretty good at shrugging off the other stuff that people say in testimony meeting, What is different here that makes it so difficult to simply shrug off "crazy Savannah claiming that she wants to someday go apostate and marry a woman someday"?

1) I'll grant that the severity is not the same as setting off a bomb.  The parallel remains.  And the fact that the adults encouraging the behavior did not care about the welfare of the child in question was the thrust of my observation.

2) Yes, people go off on tangents during testimony meeting.  The line I'd draw is where someone starts saying something apostate vs saying personal views.  The declaration that one is about to leave the Church is just that -- a statement of apostasy.

Edited June 26, 2017 by Guest

[The Folk Prophet]

7 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

1) I'll grant that the severity is not the same as setting off a bomb.  

Perhaps much worse.

8 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

2) Yes, people go off on tangents during testimony meeting.  The line I'd draw is where someone starts saying something apostate vs saying personal views.  The declaration that one is about to leave the Church is just that -- a statement of apostasy.

In theory leadership has the responsibility to correct all false doctrine.

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Perhaps much worse.

Yes, perhaps.  It depends on the details.  I can't find sufficient details to truly determine if that is the case.

5 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

In theory leadership has the responsibility to correct all false doctrine.

True.  But the statement I was responding to was addressing a different aspect.  Thus my response addressed that concern.

[The Folk Prophet]

52 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

Yes, perhaps.  It depends on the details.  I can't find sufficient details to truly determine if that is the case.

The detail that the media blow up has occurred and if even one soul is swayed away from the gospel is sufficient. The detail that the child discussed was parented in such a manner as to even have it enter into her pre-pubescent brain that she was "gay" is sufficient. The detail that homosexuality, whether chosen or not, has become a tool to bludgeon the gospel of Christ is sufficient. Etc. etc.

[Guest]

44 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

The detail that the media blow up has occurred and if even one soul is swayed away from the gospel is sufficient. The detail that the child discussed was parented in such a manner as to even have it enter into her pre-pubescent brain that she was "gay" is sufficient. The detail that homosexuality, whether chosen or not, has become a tool to bludgeon the gospel of Christ is sufficient. Etc. etc.

I'm having trouble responding to this because I see it as a completely neutral statement.

[The Folk Prophet]

9 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

I'm having trouble responding to this because I see it as a completely neutral statement.

Neutral? I'm saying that the situation is worse than a bomb because souls are at stake instead of just lives, and the obvious effect on souls should be enough detail to make that call by.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Neutral? I'm saying that the situation is worse than a bomb because souls are at stake instead of just lives, and the obvious effect on souls should be enough detail to make that call by.

Yes, I get that.  And in a sense I agree.  But something about it in this context is making me simply go "yes..." and nothing else.  Maybe I'm just tired from a long weekend of travelling.

[cdowis]

6 hours ago, MrShorty said:

 I don't know where to draw the line in testimony meeting around letting people have their say and cutting them off. 

Can we  assume you are not authorized to make that decision, so why are you worrying about it until you become a bishop or SP.

[Just_A_Guy]

6 hours ago, MrShorty said:

 I'm not very savvy regarding JaG's slippery slope and when it is fallacious and when it is genuine. 

To be clear, I wasn't trying to draw a slippery slope.  I was exposing a logical inconsistency on the part of those who claim that their concern is primarily about LDS censorship, or about the feelings of children who express opinions the Church deems apostate.

No one has yet argued that the LDS Church has an obligation to let one of Kody Brown's kids walk into sacrament meeting and bear uninterrupted testimony of that family's "alternative structure".  And if you think kids should be able to walk up to an LDS pulpit and speak apostasy without fear of being censored or censured, then this is a contingency you either have to grapple with or else admit that your real concern is less about censorship or delicate feelings, and more about sympathy for one (and only one) particular form of behavior that the Church deems verboten.

[priesthoodpower]

This 12yr girl would not have done what she did if she had felt love and acceptance by the members in her ward, im not blaming the members but rather the culture and environment that we find ourselves in. Sometimes we are too busy with our own lives that Church becomes a once a week event, we live our normal lives during the week then we go to church on Sundays. Members bare testimony saying they Love you which is true but more of in a friendly way, not in a family way like how siblings and parents say "I love you" and are always there to support you.

When we as members in a ward can associate with and love each other at a FAMILY level, it will be easier to look past all our imperfections and embarrassments and learn to exist in the Gospel of Jesus Christ. I grew up in a small community founded by mormon settlers so everyone is mormon, over the years there have been many people, some friends and some family, that have committed and/or are living in sin, but they still go to church because they know its the right thing to do and they know the members are supportive. These people understand their position and they understand the church's position but because of the love and acceptance by the members they continue to try- they love being part of the "community", humans have an innate desire to be accepted and loved by others isnt that what the Gospel of Jesus Christ offers? The confusion in the world today is that mormons only love you if you follow their rules.

My mission president told me once, "God could come down and do missionary work himself and be a lot more effective, but he wont because he wants us to learn and grow by doing it ourselves." I think the same could be said for the concept of LOVE, God can come down and give each of us hugs but he wants us to learn and grow by doing it to each other.

 

[Vort]

11 minutes ago, priesthoodpower said:

This 12yr girl would not have done what she did if she had felt love and acceptance by the members in her ward

I disbelieve this. Rather, this 12-year-old girl would not have done what she did if her parents had not put her up to it. Utterly transparent fraud, with a girl manipulated as a pawn.

[priesthoodpower]

17 minutes ago, Vort said:

I disbelieve this. Rather, this 12-year-old girl would not have done what she did if her parents had not put her up to it. Utterly transparent fraud, with a girl manipulated as a pawn.

Apply the same to her parents, what parent would allow this to happen in a ward full of friends and family they enjoy being around? They both (parent and/or kid) probably have hostile feelings toward the church and it stems from within as a direct result of that lack of love and acceptance by their ward members. imho

Edited June 27, 2017 by priesthoodpower

[Jane_Doe]

22 hours ago, brotherofJared said:

None of these were in the report that I read. Of course CNN is going to be politically correct in their presentation. 

I hope u don't mind that I'm just not going to accept your rendition  without verification. It would drastically change my view if it was a fact that she hadn't been attending church for a year. That would change everything. If we are relying on church records for that information, I'm afraid that I'd be no more inclined to believe it than I am now.

If I recall correctly, It's on the Reddit, written by the mom herself.  (Disclaimer, it's been a few weeks since this went down so my memory might be a little foggy)

[Vort]

8 minutes ago, priesthoodpower said:

and it stems from within as a direct result of that lack of love and acceptance by their ward members. imho

How do you know this?

[The Folk Prophet]

1 hour ago, priesthoodpower said:

humans have an innate desire to be accepted and loved by others isnt that what the Gospel of Jesus Christ offers?

You seem to think the gospel is a hippie love-in.

47 minutes ago, priesthoodpower said:

Apply the same to her parents, what parent would allow this to happen in a ward full of friends and family they enjoy being around? They both (parent and/or kid) probably have hostile feelings toward the church and it stems from within as a direct result of that lack of love and acceptance by their ward members. imho

In the various callings I've had through the years I and the other members of the ward I work with have bent over backwards giving love and service to those who are bitter against the church. I have never seen this so-called lack of love you speak of. But even with all the effort, the bitterness remains.

What you're claiming here has no support. Neither is the so-called lack of love and acceptance the cause nor is an outpouring of love and acceptance a solution.

The gospel doesn't work that way. The plain facts are these: the only path back to Christ is through humility and repentance and the wicked take the truth hard. That is not the members' fault, even with the imperfections we all have.

Moreover, the implication that it is the members' fault that others are bitter means that God cannot do His work if the members are anything but perfect. Do you really believe this? Do you believe that anyone will lose their salvation because of the imperfections of others, or do you accept the truth of agency, that we are accountable for ourselves despite the good and evil influences in the world?

Edited June 27, 2017 by The Folk Prophet

[priesthoodpower]

6 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

You seem to think the gospel is a hippie love-in.

In the various callings I've had through the years I and the other members of the ward I work with have bent over backwards giving love and service to those who are bitter against the church. I have never seen this so-called lack of love you speak of. But even with all the effort, the bitterness remains.

What you're claiming her has no support. Neither is the so-called lack of love and acceptance the cause nor is an outpouring of love and acceptance a solution.

The gospel doesn't work that way. The plain facts are these: the only path back to Christ is through humility and repentance and the wicked take the truth hard. That is not the members' fault, even with the imperfections we all have.

Moreover, the implication that it is the members' fault that others are bitter means that God cannot do His work if the members are anything but perfect. Do you really believe this. Do you believe that anyone will lose their salvation because of the imperfections of others, or do you accept the truth of agency, that we are accountable for ourselves despite the good and evil influences in the world?

You have an US vs. THEM mentality. If thats what you get out of the Gospel then more power to you. Have you ever stopped to think that maybe you should serve with love and not because its a calling, im sure once you got released from your calling you stopped doing what ever it was that you were assigned to do. Try watching this mormon video for tips about how a sense of community and REALLY caring for others is developed. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBRqoJEXMhU

 

 

 

[Just_A_Guy]

Wasn't there an article somewhere saying Mom has been spending Sundays home with the kid since November of '15?  That being the case, Savannah has had only limited meaningful interactions with her ward since she was ten--until the day she popped up at testimony meeting, in lesbian-drag, telling a congregation including infants that's God's okay with gay sex.  I can see why that would be her congregation's fault.  :rolleyes:

And we all know how the latter-day libertines (read:  the mother) immediately jump to "you don't looove me anymore!" whenever we suggest that maybe God doesn't agree with all their sexual choices.  

So barring specific allegations--no, I'm not going to slander the family's ward for the family's own prima-donna exhibitionism. 

[Just_A_Guy]

12 minutes ago, priesthoodpower said:

You have an US vs. THEM mentality. If thats what you get out of the Gospel then more power to you. Have you ever stopped to think that maybe you should serve with love and not because its a calling, im sure once you got released from your calling you stopped doing what ever it was that you were assigned to do. Try watching this mormon video for tips about how a sense of community and REALLY caring for others is developed. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBRqoJEXMhU

You, too, betray an "us versus them" mentality; as betrayed by your judgy armchair psychoanalysis of TFP's church service.

It's just that, from the perspective you seem to espouse, "us" happens to include the folks who set the Church up for public humiliation; and "them" consists of the rubes like TFP who stand by the position that sin is sin, and who therefore suffer the humiliation your "us" clique chooses to heap upon them for Christ's sake.

Edited June 27, 2017 by Just_A_Guy

[priesthoodpower]

1 hour ago, priesthoodpower said:

This 12yr girl would not have done what she did if she had felt love and acceptance by the members in her ward, im not blaming the members but rather the culture and environment that we find ourselves in.

 

Culture and environment

[Guest]

1 hour ago, priesthoodpower said:

Culture and environment

I tend to believe it is because many people cannot accept our loving the sinner while eschewing the sin.  Even when we reach out in love, it is all for naught if they are so set on continuing in sin that they will refuse the love offered simply because we condemn the sin.

[NeuroTypical]

I've been thinking about how culturally-driven nonviolent action has effected massive change in our country.  A woman's right to vote, segregation, SSA right to marry.  In all cases, there was a bunch of people applying pressure on governments to change laws, and pressure on groups of people to start thinking differently.

It's different when these movements are trying to effect change in our church.  Because our story is that we're not making the rules, we're receiving them from God.  No matter how successful these movements are, no matter how many teary 12 yr olds are moved into the spotlight, no matter what we believe the rules should be - we still believe the rules come from God.  

I hear stories about the years preceding the 1978 revelation, lots of LDS folks over the world were living righteous lives, hoping and praying for the day when the priesthood would be extended to all worthy men.  A revelation came.

I have an areligious anarchist facebook buddy - he says he's studied how change like this happens in cultures.  He claims to have seen enough evidence of change happening in US culture (which includes LDS leadership), that he predicts it is only a matter of time before we're doing same-sex sealings in our temples.  From his perspective, we only need a few generations to rotate through our 1st presidency and Q12 before it happens.

From my perspective, well, I believe God makes the rules.  I have a bet with him on this issue - 20 years.  If there's gay sealing in the temple, I'll put on a pink tutu and sing "I'm a little teapot".  If there isn't, he must put on the tutu.

[Guest MormonGator]

28 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

 If there's gay sealing in the temple, I'll put on a pink tutu and sing "I'm a little teapot".  

I'm sure the entire forum is thanking you for putting this vision in our heads. 

I wouldn't put money on the church sanctioning gay marriages, but I'm sure people said the same thing about African-Americans getting the priesthood in the 1950s. 

Edited June 27, 2017 by MormonGator

[Guest]

3 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

I've been thinking about how culturally-driven nonviolent action has effected massive change in our country.  A woman's right to vote, segregation, SSA right to marry.  In all cases, there was a bunch of people applying pressure on governments to change laws, and pressure on groups of people to start thinking differently.

It's different when these movements are trying to effect change in our church.  Because our story is that we're not making the rules, we're receiving them from God.  No matter how successful these movements are, no matter how many teary 12 yr olds are moved into the spotlight, no matter what we believe the rules should be - we still believe the rules come from God.  

I hear stories about the years preceding the 1978 revelation, lots of LDS folks over the world were living righteous lives, hoping and praying for the day when the priesthood would be extended to all worthy men.  A revelation came.

I have an areligious anarchist facebook buddy - he says he's studied how change like this happens in cultures.  He claims to have seen enough evidence of change happening in US culture (which includes LDS leadership), that he predicts it is only a matter of time before we're doing same-sex sealings in our temples.  From his perspective, we only need a few generations to rotate through our 1st presidency and Q12 before it happens.

From my perspective, well, I believe God makes the rules.  I have a bet with him on this issue - 20 years.  If there's gay sealing in the temple, I'll put on a pink tutu and sing "I'm a little teapot".  If there isn't, he must put on the tutu.

True religion is supposed to be Top-Down.  Free government is supposed to be Bottom-Up.  That is what many don't understand.  They want to apply democratic principles to eternal truth.  Majority does not determine truth.

God will always be unchanging in His principles.  But there is always the Samuel Principle.  But this (our views on homosexual activity) is one of the few things that if the Church changes its position on, it would undermine virtually everything we stand for. It would nullify almost every principle we hold to be right and true.  I would have to have one heck of a Spiritual Confirmation to go along with it.

Instead, I believe... well, I was just reading 3rd & 4th Nephi lately.  Nuff said.

Edited June 27, 2017 by Guest

[The Folk Prophet]

12 hours ago, priesthoodpower said:

You have an US vs. THEM mentality. 

Who is "THEM" supposed to be? When I interact with people who are bitter against the church they are individuals and I am an individual and my intention and hope is to bring them closer to Christ. I have no idea how you draw the conclusion that creates a "vs" situation. But as it seems quite clear that you're intention is to insult me with a personal attack I guess I won't worry too much about what you mean.

12 hours ago, priesthoodpower said:

Have you ever stopped to think that maybe you should serve with love and not because its a calling

Yeah, yeah, yeah. Those who faithfully do their duty in the church must be doing it for some evil, holier-than-thou reason. Clearly only those who fail to do their duty are the true Saints.

12 hours ago, priesthoodpower said:

im sure once you got released from your calling you stopped doing what ever it was that you were assigned to do.

Generally speaking that's the way it's supposed to work. Do you expect released bishops to still give interviews? Released primary teachers to still show up and teach the class? Released librarians to still go into the library and hand out chalk every week?

Edited June 27, 2017 by The Folk Prophet